Naimfan
Mar 22, 12:14 PM
Yeah, but homosexuality is a choice.
Wrong.
Selena Gomez Hairstyle
Trending: Selena Gomez, Taylor
selena has a baby face of a 5
SELENA GOMEZ
Hairstyle Face Shape
Brad Pitt Face Shape. square
Selena Gomez
any face shape and body,
a close selena gomez up so
Make the pics i study shapes
Trending: Selena Gomez, Taylor
Selena Gomez Really Likes
Square Face Shape Hairstyles
Square Face Shape
Haircuts By Face Shape Men
for Long Face Shape Women
Taylor Lautner and Selena
Round Face Shape
Wrong.
AidenShaw
Aug 25, 11:37 PM
Bingo! Bring on the iMac Ultra with Conroe, 23" display and a powerful GPU. Now that would be an immediate purchase for me.
...also known as The New Form-Factor Conroe Mini-Tower/Pizza-Box!
The problem with the all-in-one form factor of the iMacIntel is that when the LCD dies - you have a good computer that you can't use. And if the computer dies - you have a good screen that you can't use.
Or, more likely, when the computer is obsolete you have a good screen that you can't use.
Apple needs something between the horribly constrained MiniMac, and the preposterously huge ProMac.
A Conroe (64-bit, single-socket, dual-core) system would fit the bill.... When will The Steve see the light?
...also known as The New Form-Factor Conroe Mini-Tower/Pizza-Box!
The problem with the all-in-one form factor of the iMacIntel is that when the LCD dies - you have a good computer that you can't use. And if the computer dies - you have a good screen that you can't use.
Or, more likely, when the computer is obsolete you have a good screen that you can't use.
Apple needs something between the horribly constrained MiniMac, and the preposterously huge ProMac.
A Conroe (64-bit, single-socket, dual-core) system would fit the bill.... When will The Steve see the light?
salvatorereda
Jan 13, 12:50 PM
"Macbook Air" was just reregistered on 01.11.08 as a .com
If this was the true name, Apple would of purchased the name long before Macworld.
End of Story.
If this was the true name, Apple would of purchased the name long before Macworld.
End of Story.
baxterbrittle
Aug 29, 10:16 AM
Good observation. Would be nice to see the price point on the Mini come back down to starting at $499.
Perhaps they were daydreaming during economics class. :rolleyes:
READ MY LIPS: Merom will not appear in the MacBook or Mini during 2006.
That's the same line of thought prior to the MacBook release - everyone thought they would run core solo's in the base model. The Mini could be Merom but like most here I think it will have a Yonah and hopefully go back to the $499 US price point. Personally I'm hoping they will do a MacPro and only have one model with various processor optical drive configs. Say a 1.66GHz Core Duo 512MB RAM 80GB HDD Combo BT AP etc. Then optional 1.83/2.0 Yonah 100/120GB HDD Superdrive etc. That's just me though.
Perhaps they were daydreaming during economics class. :rolleyes:
READ MY LIPS: Merom will not appear in the MacBook or Mini during 2006.
That's the same line of thought prior to the MacBook release - everyone thought they would run core solo's in the base model. The Mini could be Merom but like most here I think it will have a Yonah and hopefully go back to the $499 US price point. Personally I'm hoping they will do a MacPro and only have one model with various processor optical drive configs. Say a 1.66GHz Core Duo 512MB RAM 80GB HDD Combo BT AP etc. Then optional 1.83/2.0 Yonah 100/120GB HDD Superdrive etc. That's just me though.
gmcalpin
Jun 22, 06:02 PM
Ah yes. A porn free, tightly censored, code controlled desktop machine. That's what everyone wants right? :rolleyes:
Did you miss the part where it says OSX and iOS?
Did you miss the part where it says OSX and iOS?
m4rc
Apr 16, 05:05 AM
Firstly, can't believe this is still ongoing!
This is an interesting point of view (http://www.macworld.co.uk/news/main_news.cfm?NewsID=8320) on the whole topic.
I always compare Apple to BMW. Maybe we should all start a petition for BMW as surely it too is dieing? After all, I can buy a ford for �6000, but not a BMW - I mean, what's going on there, they don't want to make crap cars or what?
Marc
This is an interesting point of view (http://www.macworld.co.uk/news/main_news.cfm?NewsID=8320) on the whole topic.
I always compare Apple to BMW. Maybe we should all start a petition for BMW as surely it too is dieing? After all, I can buy a ford for �6000, but not a BMW - I mean, what's going on there, they don't want to make crap cars or what?
Marc
Schizo
Jan 26, 07:44 AM
Including, I noticed, my own on the 2009 thread, although I wasn't a member of this forum at the time.
A mate of mine just emailed me thus:
"Mate,
I�m just searching through google photos (got some down time at lunch for once!) and I came across this .... http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=627003&page=4 .... Your car but considering the individual posted also claims to own a Corsa and Rover HSE it doesn�t sound like you at all? looks like someone wannabe claiming ownership of your life mate :O Scary part is next page the same person posts again and shows a pic of your missus car!"
Naturally I had a look and sure enough, my car (and the wife's) in pictures no doubt stolen from the Audi A5 owners' club site.
Thought I'd let you know in case anyone is thinking of placing trust in this individual ('Mac.') - you may want to think twice.
I'm actually pretty glad we don't have either car any more - bit scary to see what some people will actually do!
A mate of mine just emailed me thus:
"Mate,
I�m just searching through google photos (got some down time at lunch for once!) and I came across this .... http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=627003&page=4 .... Your car but considering the individual posted also claims to own a Corsa and Rover HSE it doesn�t sound like you at all? looks like someone wannabe claiming ownership of your life mate :O Scary part is next page the same person posts again and shows a pic of your missus car!"
Naturally I had a look and sure enough, my car (and the wife's) in pictures no doubt stolen from the Audi A5 owners' club site.
Thought I'd let you know in case anyone is thinking of placing trust in this individual ('Mac.') - you may want to think twice.
I'm actually pretty glad we don't have either car any more - bit scary to see what some people will actually do!
Lord Blackadder
Mar 7, 06:20 PM
Because there is not enough of it, and it will increase our need of foreign oil not lessen it.
There is twice as much gasoline refined from a barrel of sweet crude than diesel.
Can you quote a source on that? As far as I'm aware, that is not necessarily true (http://www.theoildrum.com/node/2174). It all depends on what is in highest demand. Diesel can be refined into gasoline, and gasoline is what people in the US want at the moment. I will try to find some more citeable links than this (http://cr4.globalspec.com/thread/26624/Maximum-gallons-of-diesel-from-a-barrel-of-crude-oil), but my impression is that a single barrel of crude always potentially contains more diesel fuel than gasoline. This is a very market-driven process. Refineries make what people want to buy.
It's also worth pointing out that a lot of gasoline has ethanol and other compounds in it that diesel does not have, and that stuff had to be refined before being added - increasing the engery cost of refining gasoline. Regular unleaded gasoline also has more sulphur in it than the now mandatory-for-passenger-cars ULSD fuel.
For a long time, and in many places people that drove diesel vehicles did so because of the tax advantages. The taxes were kept lower in order to make commercial usage cheaper.
Diesel may be cheaper in Europe due to tax structures, but the same could be said about gasoline here. It doesn't have to be that way in either case. On a purely technical level, gasoline should actually cost more because it takes more energy to refine.
It is not greener to go diesel. It takes that resource from other parts of the economy and puts it into cars. Cars do just fine with gasoline. They are relatively clean and there is twice as much of the stuff in a gallon of oil. They don't get better mileage except in volume of stuff. Which is not the correct measurement. If cars became more diesel, then diesel would become dramatically more expensive, affecting the overall livelihood of everyone, dramatically increase the cost of oil and bring about energy devastation much faster than anyone could imagine.
Diesel takes less energy to refine, contains more energy per unit of volume, emits less CO2, you get potentially more of it out of a barrel of crude and diesel engines are always more fuel efficient than equivalent gasoline engines. Where's the problem?
I can't see how you are going to argue that it is necessary for us to drive gasoline-engined cars in order to prevent "energy devastation". Most other countries already use a much larger proportion of diesel and they seem just fine. We could make a lot more diesel with the crude we are currently extracting, and the market for gasoline will never go away.
By moving to hybrids and electrics, we actually decrease our dependence on foreign oil, and make our cars greener per mile driven. This is why it is the answer and diesel isn't.
I am not advocating that we all switch to diesel. Nor do I want to get rid of the gasoline engine (especially in performance cars!). But the USA has an unecessary obsession with the gasoline-engined car. We need diesel serial hybrids for starters, and more hybrids and diesel-engined cars of all types. There is no one solution. If tens of thousands of people in the US started buying diesel Cruzes, it would not destroy the world's energy infrastructure.
But come on - "energy devastation"?
the argument for that silent agreement ? they don't want "a horsepower arms race"... look how well that has turned out
Indeed. Same with the Japanese and their 280hp/180 km/h limit. Some of the cars made under this "agreement" were considerably faster/more powerful than was officially admitted, and anyway they did away with that a number of years ago.
There is twice as much gasoline refined from a barrel of sweet crude than diesel.
Can you quote a source on that? As far as I'm aware, that is not necessarily true (http://www.theoildrum.com/node/2174). It all depends on what is in highest demand. Diesel can be refined into gasoline, and gasoline is what people in the US want at the moment. I will try to find some more citeable links than this (http://cr4.globalspec.com/thread/26624/Maximum-gallons-of-diesel-from-a-barrel-of-crude-oil), but my impression is that a single barrel of crude always potentially contains more diesel fuel than gasoline. This is a very market-driven process. Refineries make what people want to buy.
It's also worth pointing out that a lot of gasoline has ethanol and other compounds in it that diesel does not have, and that stuff had to be refined before being added - increasing the engery cost of refining gasoline. Regular unleaded gasoline also has more sulphur in it than the now mandatory-for-passenger-cars ULSD fuel.
For a long time, and in many places people that drove diesel vehicles did so because of the tax advantages. The taxes were kept lower in order to make commercial usage cheaper.
Diesel may be cheaper in Europe due to tax structures, but the same could be said about gasoline here. It doesn't have to be that way in either case. On a purely technical level, gasoline should actually cost more because it takes more energy to refine.
It is not greener to go diesel. It takes that resource from other parts of the economy and puts it into cars. Cars do just fine with gasoline. They are relatively clean and there is twice as much of the stuff in a gallon of oil. They don't get better mileage except in volume of stuff. Which is not the correct measurement. If cars became more diesel, then diesel would become dramatically more expensive, affecting the overall livelihood of everyone, dramatically increase the cost of oil and bring about energy devastation much faster than anyone could imagine.
Diesel takes less energy to refine, contains more energy per unit of volume, emits less CO2, you get potentially more of it out of a barrel of crude and diesel engines are always more fuel efficient than equivalent gasoline engines. Where's the problem?
I can't see how you are going to argue that it is necessary for us to drive gasoline-engined cars in order to prevent "energy devastation". Most other countries already use a much larger proportion of diesel and they seem just fine. We could make a lot more diesel with the crude we are currently extracting, and the market for gasoline will never go away.
By moving to hybrids and electrics, we actually decrease our dependence on foreign oil, and make our cars greener per mile driven. This is why it is the answer and diesel isn't.
I am not advocating that we all switch to diesel. Nor do I want to get rid of the gasoline engine (especially in performance cars!). But the USA has an unecessary obsession with the gasoline-engined car. We need diesel serial hybrids for starters, and more hybrids and diesel-engined cars of all types. There is no one solution. If tens of thousands of people in the US started buying diesel Cruzes, it would not destroy the world's energy infrastructure.
But come on - "energy devastation"?
the argument for that silent agreement ? they don't want "a horsepower arms race"... look how well that has turned out
Indeed. Same with the Japanese and their 280hp/180 km/h limit. Some of the cars made under this "agreement" were considerably faster/more powerful than was officially admitted, and anyway they did away with that a number of years ago.
rmitchell248
Feb 28, 12:23 PM
here is my mess sorry i didnt clean up first
Mattsasa
Apr 2, 07:26 PM
That's funny. Your description lists every apple product you own except the iPad 2 :o
good point, he doesn't have an ipad he is just trolling.
people don't understand that if 1,000 ipads have a problem with backlight bleeding, thats still only .01% of ipad 2s Sold.
And apple will replace any ipad with backlight bleeding
good point, he doesn't have an ipad he is just trolling.
people don't understand that if 1,000 ipads have a problem with backlight bleeding, thats still only .01% of ipad 2s Sold.
And apple will replace any ipad with backlight bleeding
chinesechikn
Mar 27, 03:35 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8C148 Safari/6533.18.5)
OH noooos, you gots me theres. ;) It's not exactly easy to takes 'some' of me toys with me, but as a trade off I get an absolutely superior experience on all fronts. There are NO compromises to my controls. I get top notch visuals now that are much better than what can be done on dated consoles like the PS3 and 360, and at a much higher frame rate.
I have an iPad, I'm getting an iPad 2 for compatibility testing. I have a great phone that's similar to my iPad performance wise -- which I can plug a Wiimote into and play a ton of old games. I have a DS and I'm getting a 3DS.
I have portability for entertainment and there's nothing stoping me from bringing my PC, wheel, etc. to my friend's place, something I've done.
Who care's if the future iPad is up to par with a 360 visually as an example, it will still be subpar compared to my PC now and chances are it will still lack proper inputs.
If I wan to play a casual exploration game, a time killer, something that has fun direct interaction like World of Goo, I'll pull out my iPad. But for racing or any game that just plays better with a mouse, a wheel, a flightstick, and so on, I really can't care that my iPad or any future version is portable, if it makes playing these types of games lame.
Oh yay! These forums attract the angry Microsoft supporters, Android yahoos and now the rabid gamers are feeling insecure. We should all petition Apple to stop making compelling devices!
Here here
OH noooos, you gots me theres. ;) It's not exactly easy to takes 'some' of me toys with me, but as a trade off I get an absolutely superior experience on all fronts. There are NO compromises to my controls. I get top notch visuals now that are much better than what can be done on dated consoles like the PS3 and 360, and at a much higher frame rate.
I have an iPad, I'm getting an iPad 2 for compatibility testing. I have a great phone that's similar to my iPad performance wise -- which I can plug a Wiimote into and play a ton of old games. I have a DS and I'm getting a 3DS.
I have portability for entertainment and there's nothing stoping me from bringing my PC, wheel, etc. to my friend's place, something I've done.
Who care's if the future iPad is up to par with a 360 visually as an example, it will still be subpar compared to my PC now and chances are it will still lack proper inputs.
If I wan to play a casual exploration game, a time killer, something that has fun direct interaction like World of Goo, I'll pull out my iPad. But for racing or any game that just plays better with a mouse, a wheel, a flightstick, and so on, I really can't care that my iPad or any future version is portable, if it makes playing these types of games lame.
Oh yay! These forums attract the angry Microsoft supporters, Android yahoos and now the rabid gamers are feeling insecure. We should all petition Apple to stop making compelling devices!
Here here
wheezy
Nov 15, 06:37 PM
That really depends on the program, on how "parallelizable" the application is.
The simplest way to think of it is like this: Let's say you have a program that first has to calculate A. Then, when it's done that, it uses the result of A to calculate B. Then, when it's done that, uses the result of B to calculate C, then C to D, and so on. That's a *serial* problem there. The calculation of B can't begin until A is done, so it doesn't matter how many processors you have running, all computation is held up on one spot.
On the other hand, let's say you have an application that needs to calculate A, B, C and D, but those four values are not dependent on each other at all. In that case, you can use four processors at the same time, to calculate all four values at the same time.
Think of it like baking a cake. You can't start putting on the icing until the cake is done baking. And you can't start baking the cake until the ingredients are all mixed together. But you can have people simultaneously getting out and measuring the ingredients.
So that problem is partially parallelizable, but the majority of its workload is a serial process.
Some software applications, just by their very nature, will never be able to do anything useful with multiple processors.
What a very lovely analogy. Thank you.
For me... 8 cores for the bragging rights only... so I guess I won't get one anytime soon. I'm sure 4 would suit me fine though, I need to upgrade my 1Ghz G4!!!
The simplest way to think of it is like this: Let's say you have a program that first has to calculate A. Then, when it's done that, it uses the result of A to calculate B. Then, when it's done that, uses the result of B to calculate C, then C to D, and so on. That's a *serial* problem there. The calculation of B can't begin until A is done, so it doesn't matter how many processors you have running, all computation is held up on one spot.
On the other hand, let's say you have an application that needs to calculate A, B, C and D, but those four values are not dependent on each other at all. In that case, you can use four processors at the same time, to calculate all four values at the same time.
Think of it like baking a cake. You can't start putting on the icing until the cake is done baking. And you can't start baking the cake until the ingredients are all mixed together. But you can have people simultaneously getting out and measuring the ingredients.
So that problem is partially parallelizable, but the majority of its workload is a serial process.
Some software applications, just by their very nature, will never be able to do anything useful with multiple processors.
What a very lovely analogy. Thank you.
For me... 8 cores for the bragging rights only... so I guess I won't get one anytime soon. I'm sure 4 would suit me fine though, I need to upgrade my 1Ghz G4!!!
Gem�tlichkeit
Apr 26, 01:58 PM
apple created a storefront they called "app store"
amazon creates a store front that does the same t hing called the "appstore"
apple wins in this situation.
amazon creates a store front that does the same t hing called the "appstore"
apple wins in this situation.
milo
Sep 6, 05:06 PM
ironically, this is why Apple stock does not plummet like other computer vendors. giving buyers few options to upgrade forces people to keep upgrading the system. you know that Apple Mac users upgrade their computer more often than PC users.
Or it encourages them to look at PC alternatives. Do you have a source on mac users upgrading more often? Among the people I know it's the other way around.
Or it encourages them to look at PC alternatives. Do you have a source on mac users upgrading more often? Among the people I know it's the other way around.
gwangung
Apr 21, 11:59 AM
If someone breaks into my home and hacks into my Mac (using the OS X DVD to do a password reset), I have a lot more worries than whether they know how to find out what neighborhoods� cell towers I�ve used! Luckily, encrypting your iPhone backup is simple, automatic, and unbreakable; and has the added benefit that then your iPhone�s keychain gets included in the backup. (Otherwise it doesn�t, with good reason.)
If, on the other hand, they steal my phone, they�re unlikely to stop me from remotely shredding it so fast their head spins :)
That said, dumping the old cached data is good practice, and Apple really needs to do so. I�d be surprised if they didn�t patch it to do just that. So: good catch! (Of course, this was noticed months ago.)
Yep, both of these are good points.
If, on the other hand, they steal my phone, they�re unlikely to stop me from remotely shredding it so fast their head spins :)
That said, dumping the old cached data is good practice, and Apple really needs to do so. I�d be surprised if they didn�t patch it to do just that. So: good catch! (Of course, this was noticed months ago.)
Yep, both of these are good points.
surroundfan
Sep 6, 06:56 AM
Most of Europe's down. Oz and the US are still up, so a product update's unlikely (I'd guess)...
RITZFit
Apr 9, 10:10 PM
For the record I very much prefer a stick shift.....better fuel economy
Ha! I get terrible gas mileage. I'm too busy winding the damn thing out to redline :D
Ha! I get terrible gas mileage. I'm too busy winding the damn thing out to redline :D
medazinol
Nov 29, 04:36 PM
Like everyone else, I've seen the pictures of the back of the iTV (no video in ports) but I'd really like to able to record on this puppy.
I'll still buy one because I have tons of video I'd rather watch on my plasma pulled from my iMac rather than wasting CDs and DVDs. Sorry but my XBOX 360 limitation to WMV streaming via Conenect360 just doesn't cut it...
I'll still buy one because I have tons of video I'd rather watch on my plasma pulled from my iMac rather than wasting CDs and DVDs. Sorry but my XBOX 360 limitation to WMV streaming via Conenect360 just doesn't cut it...
sagasaga
Jan 12, 05:48 AM
Something more than it being light. If I had to guess, I bet the fully-connected theme from the iphone will be moved to a new subnotebook line. 3g everywhere, instantly, built into the notebook. The more portable the device, the more internet-everywhere makes sense. Also fits into the 'something in the air' bit more than just being a light weight device. Nothing new as many manufacturers sell add-on cards to existing notebooks, but I bet it will be a core feature of the device. Ties well into some of Leopard's remote access features, too.
wireless technology just isn't there for wireless power or wireless monitors; *maybe* wireless speakers, but that's getting a little iffy as a big add.
maybe the touchpad will actually be an lcd screen like an iphone; that could be interesting for multitouch.
sagasaga
wireless technology just isn't there for wireless power or wireless monitors; *maybe* wireless speakers, but that's getting a little iffy as a big add.
maybe the touchpad will actually be an lcd screen like an iphone; that could be interesting for multitouch.
sagasaga
paulsecic
Jul 19, 05:38 PM
and the train kept 'a rollin', all night long.
I'm about ready to buy a 20" iMac but I want the new OS. How long do I have to wait?
I'm about ready to buy a 20" iMac but I want the new OS. How long do I have to wait?
twoodcc
Nov 4, 05:13 PM
congrats to rwh202 for getting 2 million points!
miniConvert
Aug 7, 05:11 AM
Last time we played we beat you 3-0 in England im pretty sure.
We should have won the bloody world cup.
We dominated against Italy until Grosso dived and got the most dodgy penalty in history, then we would have smashed ukraine in the quarters, then we would have been in the semi's against Germany, then anythign could have happened. Lets just say FIFA didnt want us to win, because its the one sport we 'aren't meant to dominate'. So the ref played it that way.
People should have learned not to count out an Aussie. Our spirit means we have the best in every field from sport to soldiers.
We would kick ur ass
Well, that's certainly a 'spirited' post! O_o
We should have won the bloody world cup.
We dominated against Italy until Grosso dived and got the most dodgy penalty in history, then we would have smashed ukraine in the quarters, then we would have been in the semi's against Germany, then anythign could have happened. Lets just say FIFA didnt want us to win, because its the one sport we 'aren't meant to dominate'. So the ref played it that way.
People should have learned not to count out an Aussie. Our spirit means we have the best in every field from sport to soldiers.
We would kick ur ass
Well, that's certainly a 'spirited' post! O_o
BenRoethig
Aug 29, 08:59 AM
Those speeds line up exactly with the T5000 series of Merom.
boncellis
Jul 18, 02:51 PM
I have mixed feelings about this. The only way I see this really becoming big is if Apple releases a Mac Mini media center. By so doing, Apple will catch a huge market of people who say, "What do you want to watch tonight?" How many times have you been in this situation. You've looked at all your movies, which you've seen at least three times each, and decide that you don't have anything you want to watch. Would if, from your remote, you had a whole movie store IN YOUR HOME? That's right. Who needs to go to Blockbuster or wait for NetFlix. Just point, click, and...hello, movie. You get to keep it for a few days.
This will only work, though, if it is that easy. If people have to figure out their own way to get it to the TV, they will simply go get the DVD from Blockbuster, because the player is already hooked up to the TV. If Apple wants to make it in the movie business, they need to build something that is meant to hook up to the TV right OUT OF THE BOX.
I'm excited to see it!
Right. Just like that super successful venture Moviebeam.
This will only work, though, if it is that easy. If people have to figure out their own way to get it to the TV, they will simply go get the DVD from Blockbuster, because the player is already hooked up to the TV. If Apple wants to make it in the movie business, they need to build something that is meant to hook up to the TV right OUT OF THE BOX.
I'm excited to see it!
Right. Just like that super successful venture Moviebeam.
